Abdullah Al-Hassan, Mary E. Burfisher, Mr. Julian T Chow, Ding Ding, Fabio Di Vittorio, Dmitriy Kovtun, Arnold McIntyre, Ms. Inci Ötker, Marika Santoro, Lulu Shui, and Karim Youssef
Deeper economic integration within the Caribbean has been a regional policy priority since the establishment of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and the decision to create the Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME). Implementation of integration initiatives has, however, been slow, despite the stated commitment of political leaders. The “implementation deficit” has led to skepticism about completing the CSME and controversy regarding its benefits. This paper analyzes how Caribbean integration has evolved, discusses the obstacles to progress, and explores the potential benefits from greater integration. It argues that further economic integration through liberalization of trade and labor mobility can generate significant macroeconomic benefits, but slow progress in completing the institutional arrangements has hindered implementation of the essential components of the CSME and progress in economic integration. Advancing institutional integration through harmonization and rationalization of key institutions and processes can reduce the fixed costs of institutions, providing the needed scale and boost to regional integration. Greater cooperation in several functional policy areas where the region is facing common challenges can also provide low-hanging fruit, creating momentum toward full integration as the Community continues to address the obstacles to full economic integration.
The process of economic development is characterized by substantial reallocations of resources
across sectors. In this paper, we construct a multi-sector model in which there are barriers to the
movement of labor from low-productivity traditional agriculture to modern sectors. With the barrier
in place, we show that improvements in productivity in modern sectors (including agriculture) or
reductions in transportation costs may lead to a rise in agricultural employment and through terms-oftrade
effects may harm subsistence farmers if the traditional subsistence sector is larger than a critical
level. This suggests that policy advice based on the earlier literature needs to be revised. Reducing
barriers to mobility (through reductions in the cost of skill acquisition and institutional changes) and
improving the productivity of subsistence farmers needs to precede policies designed to increase the
productivity of modern sectors or decrease transportation costs.
This paper tests the theoretical framework developed by North, Wallis and Weingast (2009) on the transition from closed to open access societies. They posit that societies need to go through three doorsteps: (i) the establishment of rule of law among elites; (ii) the adoption of perpetually existing organizations; and (iii) the political control of the military. We identify indicators reflecting these doorsteps and graphically test the correlation between them and a set of political and economic variables. Finally, through Identification through Heteroskedasticity we test these relationships econometrically. The paper broadly confirms the logic behind the doorsteps as necessary steps in the transition to open access societies. The doorsteps influence economic and political processes, as well as each other, with varying intensity. We also identify income inequality as a potentially important force leading to social change.
This paper reviews the experience of economic growth during the twentieth century with a view to highlighting implications for both growth economists and policy-makers. The unprecedented divergence in income levels between the OECD economies and many developing countries is documented but so too is a more optimistic picture of widespread progress in terms of the Human Development Index. Various aspects of the changes in economic structure are explored in terms of their implications for growth performance both in retrospect and prospect. The possibility that the growth process will lead to another globalization backlash reminiscent of the 1930s is analyzed.